Interesting and much welcomed from this Canadian. However they did mention 'Higher Density" 77W to be delivered next summer. Me thinks 10W Y is coming for AC 777's, Probably go 9W Y+ with Old seats at 33-34"

Would be nice sooner as I'm thinking of flying to Canada in March to visit my family over Easter and I thought I'd finally splurge on their executive class for both the transatlantic and domestic portions of the flight ...

Quoting flyyul (Reply 1):this is not a confirmation - it's speculation based on rumour.

Agreed, but believe that it is being reported from Financial Post, which you may even receive onboard Air Canada flights, I think would be a strong indicator that this rumor maybe true.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 2):Interesting and much welcomed from this Canadian. However they did mention 'Higher Density" 77W to be delivered next summer. Me thinks 10W Y is coming for AC 777's, Probably go 9W Y+ with Old seats at 33-34"

I wonder as well, maybe 34-35" pitch in Y+, be really nice on YVR-SYD & YYZ-HKG flights without having to pay for Executive First price.

In my opinion the UA type of Y+ product has a much larger potential market than a separate premium Y class of service. Many passenger can justify the small additional fare premium for Y+ service with a few more inches of seat pitch, than for the BA type of premium Y where the fare premium is often quite high and out of reach of most passengers, and also rarely covered by corporate travel policies. Offering a product that elite frequent flyers can be upgraded to also makes more sense. The Canadian market for a true premium Y product at a 20 or 25% fare premium over unrestricted Y would be too small in my opinion, and would also risk cannibalizing J traffic.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 8):They ought to! they have enough Ex UA people on Board I'll bet that the product is "Economy plus" with another name.
the $29 for the extra leg room? depends on how much you value your Knees.

For $29, it is worth it if you are taller... I've done that on United before, and would do it again.

"20% over Latitude" is an entirely different thing, however. Often the Latitutde fare is more than restricted Executive fare (and that is without the 20% mark-up).

And LH. Given the AC-LH JV and code-sharing on the same route, I'd be surprised if there isn't some comparability with LH's Y+ (if they introduce it). LH is calling the product "premium economy", not "economy plus".

Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 10):"20% over Latitude" is an entirely different thing, however. Often the Latitutde fare is more than restricted Executive fare (and that is without the 20% mark-up).

Yes, that would just create unsellable seats. However, with full fare Y one pays for the flexibility that only a small portion of travelers really need. Therefore a restricted Y+ fare based on Tango+ fare rules with 20 - 40% markup would make sense.
Or M and U fare buckets could just become Y+ restricted.
Unrestricted Y+ would be most likely eligible for complimentary upgrade, similarly to Latitude fares.

This topic has piqued my curiosity and I cannot help speculate on the possibilities. As an example, having a look at the B77W seat map, I imagine the replacement of the J seats in rows 7 - 11 with a premium economy configuration. Ideally, I would as an armchair CEO go for 2-4-2 with a 36-38 pitch. Of course, it may end up as 3-3-3 with additional pitch and economy 3-4-3 with 32 inch pitch. How does one calculate the benefits of 10 vs 9 across if 10 compensates with more pitch as the case with EK?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 9):
In my opinion the UA type of Y+ product has a much larger potential market than a separate premium Y class of service. Many passenger can justify the small additional fare premium for Y+ service with a few more inches of seat pitch, than for the BA type of premium Y where the fare premium is often quite high and out of reach of most passengers, and also rarely covered by corporate travel policies. Offering a product that elite frequent flyers can be upgraded to also makes more sense. The Canadian market for a true premium Y product at a 20 or 25% fare premium over unrestricted Y would be too small in my opinion, and would also risk cannibalizing J traffic.

I have to agree, if only because most discounted Y fares out of Canada are more or less at the price point that Y+ sells at in competitive markets.

For example, earlier this year, I was looking for Y+ ticket to DEL in April:AF NYC-DEL - $2100. AFYUL-DEL - $3000.

In the end I settled for TKYYZ-DEL in a Y+/Y for $2000. From NYC, it was selling for $1500. (I have been known to include NYC on my itineraries to DEL using Avion points to get there and to notch up SPG qualifying nights at great rates at airport hotels - and do some shopping with the savings)

Similarly, in December, I will be travelling to DEL and LHR. I ended up booking two separate tickets because it was more cost effective.

These were prices at the time of booking - right now the VS ticket is a shade higher at ~$1450, but the direct YOW-LHR is now in the $1500 range.

At these price points, trying to add a 20% premium... not sure it will work. Canadians don't have as much disposable income as Americans and are already paying higher fares, so its a lost cause - as is perhaps natural given that we are playing close to Y+ fares for Y seats, which sums up the state of 'competitiion' in the Canadian aviation market.

For this reason alone, I think they'll go for the UA variety of Y+ - couple of extra inches for $50 on a $1300 ticket. Trying to sell a 6-7hr flight to Europe for $1800....don't see it working.

Perhaps not ... but why chase after a title that is not necessary. Air Canada competes very well against its supposedly "world class" competitors. And being "world class" gets you not one penny more than your not "world class" competitors.

Sure, its cool to get little extras ... would you pay for them ... nope. Why do you think aviation is going the other way? Why do you think it is the LCCs that will take over the world? Because that is what the passenger wants ... a cheap safe seat from A to B. Joe Blow traveller doesn't give a rat's empennage about "world class".

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17):Sure, its cool to get little extras ... would you pay for them ... nope.

Well, the question is how much is the "little extra". If the ticket price would be ElPistolero's $1800 (or 2k for a RT flight BUD or KRK), I would definitely go for it. However, if AC would do what LO just did, then no, I wouldn't pay for it. They are selling (or rather trying to sell?) Y+ seats to Europe for quite a buck. I priced out a YYZ-WAW-KRK RT trip for next July; they are asking $3600 for it. Just for comparison, this year's price for the same flight in J was $2350...you can draw the conclusion yourself.

Another example, albeit not entirely accurate, since AC Vacations doesn't equal AC. I was browsing Expedia today for some last minute deals for vacation packages down south. I found a 4* resort in Samana (Dominican Republic) with Sunwing. Departure Dec.9, 7 nights, $ 615. The same resort, on the same day, with the same accommodation and other amenities is offered by AC Vacations for $985. What can AC Vacations offer for $370 (or 60% price premium)? Two inches of legroom, half inch of seat width, a PTV on a 4 hour flight (if the aircraft isn't one of the Margueritas) and 50% of status miles? Sorry, I wouldn't go for it, it's just too much of price difference. So in this case, Sunwing's 189 seater B738 would win.

Quoting polaris (Reply 18):Perhaps the Premium Economy seating is planned for the new leisure division.

Perhaps you are correct. It's plausible and makes sense as I would expect there is a some demand for premium type seating on leisure routes. A small part of the LCC customer base has the disposable income to pay for the additional comfort. That's no to say it will not introduced on the mainline fleet.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 16):At these price points, trying to add a 20% premium... not sure it will work. Canadians don't have as much disposable income as Americans and are already paying higher fares, so its a lost cause - as is perhaps natural given that we are playing close to Y+ fares for Y seats, which sums up the state of 'competitiion' in the Canadian aviation market.

Most Canadians vote with their wallet, time and time again. The demand just simply is not there for upgraded fares!

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17):Sure, its cool to get little extras ... would you pay for them ... nope. Why do you think aviation is going the other way? Why do you think it is the LCCs that will take over the world? Because that is what the passenger wants ... a cheap safe seat from A to B. Joe Blow traveller doesn't give a rat's empennage about "world class".

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 19):Another example, albeit not entirely accurate, since AC Vacations doesn't equal AC. I was browsing Expedia today for some last minute deals for vacation packages down south. I found a 4* resort in Samana (Dominican Republic) with Sunwing. Departure Dec.9, 7 nights, $ 615. The same resort, on the same day, with the same accommodation and other amenities is offered by AC Vacations for $985. What can AC Vacations offer for $370 (or 60% price premium)? Two inches of legroom, half inch of seat width, a PTV on a 4 hour flight (if the aircraft isn't one of the Margueritas) and 50% of status miles? Sorry, I wouldn't go for it, it's just too much of price difference. So in this case, Sunwing's 189 seater B738 would win.

You also get with Sunwing foreign air crew who are brought in against current immigration laws from Sunwing's "big brother'" in Europe who do not need to be trained up onto the 737 in most cases. The training costs that Sunwing can avoid puts them at a huge competitive advantage over Canadian Carriers such as AC and AT who train Canadian pilots onto the equipment they are flying. There were some Czech pilots who came to do a sim ride to operate the 737s here and they failed the TC flight test. They came back a week later operating Czech registered airplanes with the Czech licenses.

Sunwing has told our government that in order to fly for them you need 500 hours 737 time and a current 737 type rating which means almost all Air Canada and Air Transat pilots would be unqualified for positions with Sunwing which is bogus. They are going against the norm in Canada to undercut carriers that employ tax paying Canadian.

Their impact has been so great that AT has had to lay off some pilots recently. So while Sunwing has foreign pilots coming in paying no Canadian income tax, we have AT pilots getting rather large EI cheques.

Sure they vote with their wallets (insofar as one can 'choose'
when most of the capacity available in Canada is of the same quality/price - at least the tail colors are different, eh - with the exception of a few carriers that aren't allowed to fly daily). Doesn't change the fact that they're priced out of a PE segment by virtue of being burdened by higher Y fares than most (all?) competitive market. I fly Y+ and J when my origin and destination don't involve Canada because the prices are significantly lower. In theory, I would be a potential Y+ customer for AC. The problem is that the 20% premium I am willing to pay is already absorbed in Canadian Y fares.

Does that make me cheap? Or does it mean that the high Y prices have all but obliterated a Canadian premium economy segment to the extent that anything fancier than a UA Y+ is more likely to attract J pax than Y ones?

The Y+ market exists, as is evident in the business models of QF, VS, BA, CX etc... That it doesn't exist much in Canada is a function of airfares (which in turn is related to competition) and disposable income.

What goes around comes around. Before J class in the mid-80s, Air Canada had a first class cabin that was nowhere near as nice as today's J-class. They had a premium economy service called "Connoisseur", a bit fancier meals, front of the Y cabin, first on, first off (of the Y pax), headrest cloths on the seats, etc.

I have to admit, you've got me on this one. Especially since I'm a naturalized immigrant myself and it was quite a job to obtain the right to live and work in Canada. It really bothers me when I see that some are using shortcuts...

However, you can substitute Sunwing with Nolitours. You pay the same as with WG and you get to fly C6 or TS. You fly with Canadians and still pay only 62% of AC's price.

With a solid helping of protectionism. How would it fare if we truly had an unrestricted market?

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17):Why do you think it is the LCCs that will take over the world?

I wish we had an LCC in Canada. AC is moving to LCC service (see 10-abreast on new 777s) and keeping full service Y fares. That's what I find ridiculous.

Quoting ANM604 (Reply 22):Most Canadians vote with their wallet, time and time again.

They certainly do. That's why EK, EY, QR, TK, etc. all have great load factors and want more of this market.

Quoting ANM604 (Reply 22):The demand just simply is not there for upgraded fares!

Yet, CX, BA, AF, TK all seem to do alright with their Y+ out of Canada. And certainly if Y+ fares approached anything that is charged out of the States, I am certain you'd see much more uptake. El Pistolero gave a good example with TK's Comfort Class. I had the same experience going to BOM.

I have long argued for some protection of AC. Especially against EK's push. This is getting harder to justify and support when AC so blatantly fleeces customers. For example, will there be a drop in Y fares when they go 10-abreast or will AC pocket it all?

The EU countries are no mugs on flight safety. As for pilots, if Sunwing can find a legal way of getting cheap pilots, I am all for it. After all, it's not like Canadian airlines aren't using/considering using maintenance companies around the world. If one set of high skilled workers can be dropped to cut costs, pilots are going to end up in the same boat sooner or later - frankly I don't see why that's a bad thing.

As for the whole 'employ tax paying Canadians' bit - sure it's great, but at what cost? After all, any such calculation would also have to include the discretionary incomes savings generated by lower airfares. Discretionary income, most economists suspect, will be a key aspect of economic growth over the next year or two. Every little bit helps. If Sunwing saves Canadians money that they can use in other sectors of the economy, that's not a bad thing in my opinion.

On topic, however, the global market is heading towards lower costs. Some might see that as a move towards LCCs, but I contend that despite this move, which, incidentally, opens up a whole new market of flyers, there is a Y+ segment among leisure travelers. That said, it exists at certain price points that generally don't exist in large numbers Canada, but does exist globally. In fact, I don't know the numbers, but I suspect TS makes a fair but of revenue up front for fares that aren't much higher than the standard Y ticket in Canada. If you get European or American prices in Canada, the Y+ market will reveal itself.

In fairness to AC etc, if you can sell a Y product for a Y+ price, why not? Makes complete sense, though it kills off the possibility of putting in a real Y+ product.

AC carries almost twice as many people between the UK and Canada as BA. Would you not consider BA "world class"? How about QF, another "world class" carrier. Whenever QF competed against both AC and CP, they pulled out. In fact, when the route applied, AC carried more people between HNL and SYD, then either QF or HA!

Of course there are other factors. There always are, that's why being "world class" has little to do with putting passengers in seats. And that is why chasing a non-essential title for nothing other than prestige and back slapping is not good business sense.

Quoting ytz (Reply 28): That's why EK, EY, QR, TK, etc. all have great load factors and want more of this market.

Slightly less load factors as AC. But, if you want to segue to yet another Gulf Carrier Competition thread, then perhaps you should start one.

Quoting ytz (Reply 28):I have long argued for some protection of AC. Especially against EK's push. This is getting harder to justify and support when AC so blatantly fleeces customers. For example, will there be a drop in Y fares when they go 10-abreast or will AC pocket it all?

So ifAC goes to 10 abreast, that is fleecing its customers and KL, EK, AF, NZ etc etc etc are not? Did these carriers drop their fares, or did they just align the product cost given with their fare paid? Its hard to imagine AC "blatantly fleecing its Customers" when they win dozens of "best of" awards every year.

Quoting ANM604 (Reply 22):Most Canadians vote with their wallet, time and time again.

And that's the bottom line. If they are not competitive, they will lose Customers. So far, they are maintaining among the highest load factors in the business!

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 29):The EU countries are no mugs on flight safety. As for pilots, if Sunwing can find a legal way of getting cheap pilots, I am all for it. After all, it's not like Canadian airlines aren't using/considering using maintenance companies around the world. If one set of high skilled workers can be dropped to cut costs, pilots are going to end up in the same boat sooner or later - frankly I don't see why that's a bad thing.

The big issue is "legal". With regard to current Canadian Labour Laws, whether this practise is legal is presently coming under scrutiny.

And no, its not a bad thing as long as its safe .. and that was the other issue coming under scrutiny.

It is a fascinating issue, probably worthy of of own thread, not one about Premium Economy at Air Canada.

I guess we all agree that viability of Y+boils down to proper pricing. Could someone calculate how much more would have an airline to charge for the Y+ seat just to break even? Could someone compare 8/36" to 10/31" seating on a 777?

As you point out, airline' success on certain routes is based on many factors, particularly the efficient use of scarce resources.

I don't think load factors mean much either given the relative speed at which other airlines are increasing capacity. AC's capacity increase has been delayed by the 787, but the market hasn't stopped growing. Admittedly this has nothing to do with quality either, though one wonders how much capacity restraints contributed to AC's awful on time performance for more than half this year (OTP is a part of 'service). Trying to do much with not enough can boost LFs and degrade quality.

However, YTZ is correct to point out that AC is protected. Saying we have open skies on selective routes is not a strong argument. BA or PK for that matter can fly here as much as they want to but if they don't have the capacity, they don't have the capacity. Restricting airlines that do have the capacity renders the market 'protected' since suppliers cannot respond to demand, which I think we all can agree is not static but reacts to changes in prices.

AC is protected. It actively calls for protection. Does it offer a good product? Yes. The question that YTZ asks remains: would AC be able to hold its own in the face of 'real' completion. Part of its ability to deliver the product it does, which is a good product, is based on its ability to command Y+ prices for a Y product. These prices are directly related to protectionism - under served market + artificially depressed supply = high prices. AC has a captive market. If that is subjected to competitive pressure, it will lower prices (opening a new Y+ segment) and make it difficult for AC to maintain current standards. The protectionist aspect is valid. It's the reason AC hasn't put in a Y+ yet. It doesn't have to discriminate between Y and Y+ to get people to fly - it can charge them both Y+ prices for a Y product.

On Sunwing, yes it's worth it's own thread. That said, I m wary of professional associations in this country. If one listened to them, one would be forgiven for thinking that foreign-trained doctors are just taxi drivers who bought fake medical degrees to come to Canada to drive cabs - screening by Canadian immigration officials is apparently a joke, as, apparently are TC regulations.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 30):AC carries almost twice as many people between the UK and Canada as BA.

Should we compare profits over the life of the companies?

Load factor is only half the equation and you know it. And BA scarcely competes in Canada because it has bigger fish to fry. Why would BA waste a precious Heathrow slot on YEG or YHZ?

Quoting longhauler (Reply 30):But, if you want to segue to yet another Gulf Carrier Competition thread, then perhaps you should start one.

I have long argued against allowing unfettered expansion by the Gulf Three. That said, I am certainly not impressed by AC's service and I would like to see more competition. I would love to see TK be given unfettered access.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 30): Its hard to imagine AC "blatantly fleecing its Customers" when they win dozens of "best of" awards every year.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. The "best of" awards they win are usually in the shallow end of the pool with other North American majors. I have always agreed that AC is the best major airline in North America (Best airline in NA maybe VX). But that's not saying much.

Quoting zbbylw (Reply 23):You also get with Sunwing foreign air crew who are brought in against current immigration laws

If this is true, and the government is permitting wanton violation of the country's immigration laws, why haven't the other carriers gone to court to stop it?

Quoting zbbylw (Reply 23):The training costs that Sunwing can avoid puts them at a huge competitive advantage over Canadian Carriers such as AC and AT who train Canadian pilots onto the equipment they are flying.

There is no way the training costs account for the difference in fares.

Quoting zbbylw (Reply 23):There were some Czech pilots who came to do a sim ride to operate the 737s here and they failed the TC flight test. They came back a week later operating Czech registered airplanes with the Czech licenses.

Again, why are the other airlines silent about the negligence of authorities?

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 32):I guess we all agree that viability of Y+boils down to proper pricing. Could someone calculate how much more would have an airline to charge for the Y+ seat just to break even? Could someone compare 8/36" to 10/31" seating on a 777?

5 rows of Y at 31" = 4 rows of W at 38" (which is the industry standard for a proper W product).

So that's 45-50 Y seats (depending on config) to 32 W seats, which means AC essentially needs to sell the W fares for about 1.6x the Y fare just to break even (remembering that W style service will cost them more as well). That's a tough ask when their Y fares are already so high.

I think a Y+ style product would work better for them. They'd probably be able to achieve the additional pitch in 4-5 rows without losing any seats further back (perhaps with new seats that are thinner, or just by squeezing everything in even more) and have the potential to make an additional $1000-1500 per flight if all 45-50 seats are sold. It's unlikely that they ever will be all sold once you consider free upgrades etc, but it's far easier to sell Y+ and it will provide a more stable/guaranteed income that a proper W product, which I think would be quite a big risk for AC.

There is no definition of world class. Let's face it.....the ONLY thing that matters is profits. By that standard, Southwest and Westjet are world class....I'm reminded of that every time I get a dividend from both carriers once a quarter in my RBC account.

AC competes very well? How so? AC is losing money, constantly. That is not competing, that is floundering. AC came VERY close to shutting down this year (perhaps permanently) with the imminent strikes. Could AC have survived prolonged strikes? Likely not. AC now gets to live another day due simply to protectionism by a meddling Fed govt imposing back-to-work legislation. To say that AC "competes well" is to be oblivious to its horrendous financials.

Quoting ANM604 (Reply 22):Most Canadians vote with their wallet, time and time again.

Exactly, that why Westjet (AC's primary competitor) is growing and profitable, while AC is not.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 24):The Y+ market exists, as is evident in the business models of QF, VS, BA, CX etc... That it doesn't exist much in Canada is a function of airfares

The Y+ market exists everywhere. There will always be customers who will pay a bit more for more leg room. The challenge is to ensure the additional revenue covers the additional floor space in the cabin and does not canibalize business class. Westjet is adding a Y+ cabin that will likely steal some pax away from AC's business class.

Yes, I've done a similar calculation myself and came to similar numbers. However, there is a factor that makes W less expensive - there is about 3000 lbs less weight to transport. This is what I'm unable to factor into the calculation.

That said, if AC would use the same pricing algorithms they are using for Y, my YXU - YYZ - FRA - KRK trip in Tango Plus S fare bucket priced at $ 1347 would convert into $ 2155, which I still find fully acceptable for proper W service.

It may, however I'm not interested in 2 inches of legroom in a 10 abreast 777 or 9 abreast 787. With the 787's 16.8" seat I may as well fly TS.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 37):Westjet is adding a Y+ cabin that will likely steal some pax away from AC's business class.

Not likely. Those who have a choice will fly either paid J or upgradable Y and still sit up front on AC aircraft. Those who have to pick the cheapest ticket (very popular travel policy nowadays), will stay in the back, regardless of the airline.

Quoting ytz (Reply 35):
If this is true, and the government is permitting wanton violation of the country's immigration laws, why haven't the other carriers gone to court to stop it?

They are in the process of doing that now. It has been and is being looked at.

Quoting ytz (Reply 35):There is no way the training costs account for the difference in fares.

Here is what Sunwing does. During the summer they have a handful of aircraft operating a few routes. In the summer they increase their fleet by some 3-400% and cheery pick the vacation routes only during the profitable time. AC, WS, AT have to find places to put all that capacity come summer. For AC, WS and AT (ignoring WS's Thomas Cook 757s for a minute because they actually do a majority of their own flying) the costs of keeping those airplanes flying and all those employees employed on a year round basis is actually very costly. In Canada outside of holidays Summer and Winter is when more people are traveling. Also training for pilots are not cheap, cost of ground school, sim is actually pretty high.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 37):AC is not faring well now, WITH its vast protectionism. It would die quickly with a truly open Cdn market.

The government is not protecting Air Canada, but their own interests. Any country that has many people flying to or from Canada directly will be allowed many seats up to and including open skies. A good example would be HK, USA, the UK, Germany etc... Where you still find restrictions in where there is no O&D market. This is why the UAE is only given 6 flights a week (EK initially turned those down trying to get 7 a week and had 3 taken from under them due to their own arrogance). The 6 flights a week are given out in order to give countries/companies a chance to develop the O&D market between Canada and their home country. If EK want's more rights they need to cut down on the arrogance and build Dubai as a Canadian vacation market and they may be in luck. Otherwise their antics only piss off our government.

On a side note, and not to have too much of a drift from the topic, do you really want 25,000 Canadians put on EI tomorrow? In this job market your tax dollars would get stretched pretty thin for a little while. I find people considering a couple hundred dollars saving in airfare shortsighted sometimes and the bigger picture nationally is worth some thought. I doubt EK would be flying YYZ-YWG or any other countless examples if AC were to fold.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 38):It may, however I'm not interested in 2 inches of legroom in a 10 abreast 777 or 9 abreast 787. With the 787's 16.8" seat I may as well fly TS.

This. Initially, I was quite interested in the 787. But now that 9-abreast is becoming standard, it's more nightmareliner than dreamliner. This is actually even less comfort than AC's 767s today. One of the last respectable aspects of AC was the fact that Y had reasonably wide seats. Like the 9-abreast 777. With that gone, I dont see the point of paying AC's inflated fares.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 38):That said, if AC would use the same pricing algorithms they are using for Y, my YXU - YYZ - FRA - KRK trip in Tango Plus S fare bucket priced at $ 1347 would convert into $ 2155, which I still find fully acceptable for proper W service.

For less than $2k I was able to fly TK in Y+ from YYZ to IST (9hr. leg) and then Y from IST to BOM. And their Y+ offering is phenomenal.

Quoting zbbylw (Reply 39):On a side note, and not to have too much of a drift from the topic, do you really want 25,000 Canadians put on EI tomorrow?

That's a weak economic argument. It does not account for the impact of lower air fares. How much tourism would lower airfares generate? And how many jobs would that create?

That's not a very good price at all, considering you're going to be in Y+ for only one of those three flights. Effectively paying $800 on a $1350 ticket, which is a 60% (?) mark up. To each their own, but to be honest I don't see this segment being large enough in the current Y market in Canada. And with household debt levels and disposable income at the current levels, I don't see this segment expanding in the near future. FWIW, $2155 for a flight of that length with multiple cabins is pretty high. But the again, if you fly alone once a year, it might well be worth it. The question then boils down to how large this segment is and how often individuals travel - after all, a person travelling the route twice annually might choose the Y option at 2 X $1350 over 1 X $2155.

Bit off topic but thats a very inaccurate statement. The ET example is the most obvious contradiction to your assertion. Also, I m amused to see 10,000 has morphed into 25,000. The entire logic underlying that claim is so bereft of facts that it is based on questionable logic. Why do I say that? Well, given the fact that cabotage is illegal, the domestic market will remain untouched. Nor is AC going to go under on account of a couple of carriers targeting a niche market (Canada-South Asia). Traffic to Europe won't disappear.

BTW, do the Aveos maintenance jobs factor into those 25,000 jobs? Who are you planning to blame for the loss of those jobs.

Quoting ytz (Reply 40):I was quite interested in the 787. But now that 9-abreast is becoming standard, it's more nightmareliner than dreamliner. This is actually even less comfort than AC's 767s today.

Couldn't agree more.

Quoting ytz (Reply 40):One of the last respectable aspects of AC was the fact that Y had reasonably wide seats. Like the 9-abreast 777. With that gone, I dont see the point of paying AC's inflated fares.

Agreed again. Based on what's written in this forum, it looks like I'm being screwed again because the airlines have to cater to Mr. Majority Customer (just as car companies cater to him and only offer cars with this automatic crap for a transmission)

Quoting ytz (Reply 40):For less than $2k I was able to fly TK in Y+ from YYZ to IST (9hr. leg) and then Y from IST to BOM. And their Y+ offering is phenomenal.

Well, OK, a YYZ - IST- BUD flight would cost around $1750 in the same time period (July 4 - July 18). However, the cost of the YXU tag on (or the cost of driving to YYZ and parking the car there), the cost of visa and the cost of the hotel in IST would push the fare well over the $ 2k mark. So, this hypothetical $2.2k AC fare would actually work for me.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 41):The question then boils down to how large this segment is and how often individuals travel - after all, a person travelling the route twice annually might choose the Y option at 2 X $1350 over 1 X $2155.

Those who travel on their own buck usually won't travel more often than once a year and probably will be interested to treat themselves to something better that the current Y offering. Those who travel more than once are business travelers who have to adhere to their company's travel policies. Policies that more often than not require flying on cheapest possible ticket (just look at FT's AC forum and the outcry caused by the TPAC and TATL Tango fares).

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 42):Those who travel on their own buck usually won't travel more often than once a year and probably will be interested to treat themselves to something better that the current Y offering. Those who travel more than once are business travelers who have to adhere to their company's travel policies. Policies that more often than not require flying on cheapest possible ticket (just look at FT's AC forum and the outcry caused by the TPAC and TATL Tango fares).

If the Y+ segment is once-yearly VFR traffic that is price-sensitive (to some degree), its going to be a difficult one for AC to pull off. If businesses aren't paying for Y+ and and the average Y+ traveller flies once a year, that cabin will not make much money.

FWIW, I do travel more than once a year on my own dime (3-4 roundtrips to LHR/DEL annually). I am also a big fan of Y+ - at least for the longest segments - but the price point you mention ($2000/GBP 1300) as acceptable would not work for me - partly because I can get the longer LHR-DEL in J (VS, 9W) for GBP 1600, J/W for GBP 1200-1300 and W for GBP 900-1100. If I have to choose between a 9hr flight in J/W for the same price as a 6-7 hr flight in W....yeah.

FWIW though, you already have an option. If BA interlines with AC (for some reason I am under the impression that they do), you could just fly BA Y+ at that price point.

Quoting ytz (Reply 40): One of the last respectable aspects of AC was the fact that Y had reasonably wide seats. Like the 9-abreast 777. With that gone, I dont see the point of paying AC's inflated fares.

I rarely find AC's fares higher than their competitors on routes where AC offers the lower seating density. And if they are sometimes higher, it doesn't seem to be affecting AC's traffic since they've been operating at load factors in the high 80s virtually all year. If AC does go to 10-abreast on 777s, it should improve profitability as very few passengers seem to care about seating space and comfort in Y class. All they want is the lowest fare, so the more passengers you can carry, the more revenue you can generate.

I certainly refuse to fly on 10-abreast 777s as long as there are other options (especially the unbeatable 7-abreast 767), but how many passengers on the average 10-abreast 777 even know there is anything better? Probably not 1 in 100.

I'm dreading the day they're transferred to the LCC (and presumably reconfigured). For the moment I'm spoiled out of YOW - 763 to LHR and FRA, and YUL-BRU (my favourite itinerary to CGN/Aachen/Antwerp/Netherlands/CDG/LYN, etc).

The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.